search for: r_0x10f290

...mgf100.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/fb/ramgf100.c index fffd01a..6ebdc4c 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/fb/ramgf100.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/fb/ramgf100.c @@ -48,11 +48,7 @@ struct gf100_ramfuc { struct ramfuc_reg r_0x137390; - struct ramfuc_reg r_0x10f290; - struct ramfuc_reg r_0x10f294; - struct ramfuc_reg r_0x10f298; - struct ramfuc_reg r_0x10f29c; - struct ramfuc_reg r_0x10f2a0; + struct ramfuc_reg r_0x10f290[5]; struct ramfuc_reg r_0x10f300; struct ramfuc_reg r_0x10f338; @@ -104,6 +100,50 @@ struct gf100_ram { struct nvbios_pll mempll;...

.../gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/fb/ramgf100.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/fb/ramgf100.c index 6ebdc4c..b4fe3bb 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/fb/ramgf100.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/fb/ramgf100.c @@ -50,11 +50,7 @@ struct gf100_ramfuc { struct ramfuc_reg r_0x10f290[5]; - struct ramfuc_reg r_0x10f300; - struct ramfuc_reg r_0x10f338; - struct ramfuc_reg r_0x10f340; - struct ramfuc_reg r_0x10f344; - struct ramfuc_reg r_0x10f348; + struct ramfuc_reg r_mr[9]; struct ramfuc_reg r_0x10f910; struct ramfuc_reg r_0x10f914; @@ -226,6 +222,19 @@ gf100_ram_calc(st...

No, no, these will not implement Fermi reclocking. This set of patches contains some of the preparatory work that I deem stable enough to move upstream. Notable changes - Training pattern upload routines from GK104+ now shared with GT215+ - Timing calculation for Fermi - GDDR5 MR calculation from VBIOS timing table v1.0. Also useful for that pesky GT 240. - A routine to translate a VBIOS init

Two patches went missing as a result of PEBCAK. No v2 marks as nothing changed really. Just resending for easier enforcement of patch order in other people's trees. Sorry for the noise. Original message: No, no, these will not implement Fermi reclocking. This set of patches contains some of the preparatory work that I deem stable enough to move upstream. Notable changes - Training pattern